Proposition B enforcement details remain fuzzy as election nears

One of the many dogs at Tenderheart Kennel in Silex jumps on its fenced enclosure. Tenderheart Kennels is owned by Hubert and Sharon Lavy, and the kennel would be affected if Proposition B passes.¦Christina Manolis

COLUMBIA — The approval of Proposition B would require hiring additional staff at an ongoing yearly cost of more than a half-million dollars, according to Missouri Department of Agriculture officials in a state auditor's report.

Department officials also said in the December 2009 fiscal note released by the office of State Auditor Susan Montee that "the current level of funding is inadequate to meet the current level of responsibilities," and "the additional responsibilities added by the initiative petition cannot be accomplished with existing funding."

Estimated Impact of Prop B

7 additional inspectors

1 additional administrative assistant

$521,356 ongoing yearly expenses

$133,412 one-time expense

$654,768 expenses in the first year

Source: Office of State Auditor Susan Montee

Proposition B is a statewide initiative that would establish new requirements for licensed dog breeders in Missouri.

But with only two weeks until the Nov. 2 election, there are still few clues as to how the initiative will be enforced if passed, if enforcement is possible at all. In a 10-month-old report, the Department of Agriculture detailed its funding shortages, but did not offer concrete enforcement plans.

The department has since declined to elaborate on the estimates in the report.

Currently, the Department of Agriculture employs 12 inspectors throughout the state, each of whom is responsible for visiting an average of 240 facilities a year. According to the Animal Care Facilities Act — the law that Proposition B will amend — every site must be inspected annually.

However, three consecutive audits of the department — in 2001, 2004, and 2008 — sharply criticized its enforcement of the law. The 2008 report noted that the department "failed to inspect 1,111 of 2,769 licensed animal care facilities" in 2006.

That means 40 percent of the facilities were not inspected in 2006 — an improvement from 2004, when about 70 percent of facilities went unvisited.

Following the 2008 audit, the department made several improvements — including conducting an internal review of policies and procedures, bringing in new management and hiring additional personnel — that have led to increased inspection rates.

The department's woes are the background to the December 2009 fiscal note. To compile fiscal notes, the auditor's office reaches out to affected government organizations for estimates of the monetary impact of each initiative.

The Department of Agriculture responded that an additional seven inspectors and one office assistant would be required by the passage of Proposition B. They also estimated significant salary, benefit and equipment costs associated with the new hires.

All told, Proposition B would require an estimated $521,326 of additional yearly funding. It would also trigger a one-time expense of more than $130,000.

For the first year, the total cost of the initiative was estimated at more than $650,000.

Conversely, the report also noted that the City of St. Louis anticipated savings of at least $200,000 if the initiative was approved. City officials said that many of the dogs confiscated in raids end up being treated and housed at the Humane Society of Eastern Missouri at an annual cost of nearly $2 million.

According to officials in the fiscal note: "Reducing the amount of excess breeding, abuse and abandonment currently occurring in puppy mills across the state is one of the most effective ways to reduce the cost to the taxpayers of the City of St. Louis for the care of unwanted and abused animals."

What the fiscal note doesn't explain is why the changes specified in Proposition B would require so many extra inspectors. However, the Department of Agriculture denied repeated requests over several weeks to interview the inspectors or anyone else involved with the enforcement of the Animal Care Facilities Act.

Michelle Daniel Thank you, Wayside, for all you do for homeless animals! I'm writing to ask for help. Halfway Home urgently needs volunteers during the week. A small group of volunteers is doing all we can to help the poor pups in this sad, outdated shelter, but Thursday only three of the nearly 150 dogs got out to stretch their legs ...and relieve themselves. I know you have amazing animal-loving supporters, and if any of them has free time during the week to help out, the dogs would be so grateful. Training at 10:30 a.m. Saturday at 4400 Raytown Road. Thank you from a HH volunteer (and owner of a Waif!)See More

This is a comment from facebook. Funny how HSUS exempted themselves, shelters, and rescues? Fuzzy?If this were a licensed kennel, they would be on the evening news.

jake carter, when your comments are answered in another thread, it's disingenuous to repeat the same misinformation in other threads. As Michelle Daniel told you, she's a strong Proposition B supporter.

Also, as was mentioned in the other thread, The Half Way Pet Adoption center is Kansas City's municipal shelter--it has to accept every dog brought in. And they get 600-700 dogs a month.

I don't think there are any fuzzy details--just a lot of deliberate misinformation about Proposition B.

Yes, the Missouri Department of Agriculture isn't particularly good about providing information. In fact, it's reticence in regards to your question is inappropriate. But then, they've been reticent with my requests, too.

Shelley,How do you think HSUS will solve the veterinarian problem?Will they bring their own vets out into the rural areas with them?Oh! What? No one thought of the repercussions?Take away the vet incomes and well the vets will tell HSUS to kiss the big white one. Yep they just had a meeting amongst themselves and get ready sister.This is the Show Me state. You pencil pushers are about to get shown.

I can agree that it doesn't have the facilities to monitor existing kennels, but that doesn't change with the bill's amendments. But any constitutional and legal challenges would come under the state's attorney general duties, not the Department of Agriculture.

As for additional duties...how? The inspectors still have to inspect the kennels. If there are fewer kennels, or the kennels are smaller with fewer dogs, wouldn't that mean less work, rather than more?

"Take away the vet incomes and well the vets will tell HSUS to kiss the big white one. Yep they just had a meeting amongst themselves and get ready sister.This is the Show Me state. You pencil pushers are about to get shown."

That is astonishingly incoherent.

I am not a pencil pusher. I don't work for the HSUS. I don't work for any animal welfare organization. I care about dogs. So save your bluster for someone who really gives a darn.

Here is the catch-22Mo Dept of AG and MVMA believe that no kennel will be able to meet any of this. I believe this to be a fact. They pulled this same stunt in TN. What did they do? They lowered that top number again down to 20.Now, when you eliminate the 1400+ licensed kennels you also eliminate all that revenue that those kennels pay into the dept of Ag. Ergo, there goes the salaries of the inspectors. Now lets look at supply and demand. Surely you know what is going to happen. Here is your problem. On Christmas morning and birthday morning they don't want some curr from a shelter. They want Tim or Tam to have a tiny shiney new purebred pup. When you take out those kennels, you also kill alot of vet practices. Times are tough right now and no clinic can stand to lose much business. The kennels are good cash flow. Sorry but this is life and that is a fact. Same goes for people like Purina who have had some financial problems of their own. So Shelly in your quest to save the puppies you are about to pull the plug on our economy. Then since you didn't read LINE#9 they will have an open door to take our meat!!!! I took it to a lawyer and she said HELL yes that is the smoking gun. You've been duped dear Shelly. Played and taken. If it passes, get ready. I just heard today that someone with really deep pockets bought up some major air time with 23 radio stations across Missouri and that veterinarians are going to speak out against prop B. I have to go with the vets on this. They say they have around 143? I guess they don't realize that there are over 2700 licensed in Mo. If the vets ain't happy ain't no body going to be happy.

I forgot to mention one thing. While you have been on this big snipe hunt, alot of kennels have started moving dogs.When it becomes impossible to be licensed and puppy prices skyrocket, what do you think will happen?It will be just like prohibition. A still in every backwood and basement.There are alot of farmers in this state with empty barns and sheds.

I haven't made any kind of threat. I've just told you what will probably happen if B does pass. Missourians aren't stupid. They are living in desperate economic times. There are alot of hard working people out there that do a terrific job and who have borrowed large sums of money to beat the "mill" stigma. 50 dogs will break them. Your organization is on a crusade.

Ultimately Shelley it is going to be an even worse mess than what it is now. You cannot change the fact that people want those pups. There is all this big money coming in from California to fund the campaign. Kind of funny that California is one of the biggest buyers of Mo. pups.

no offenseI just don't think that alot of people realize that this is going to have a chain reaction. I have a friend who is a kennel vet. Prop B will end her practice. There are 5 families that rely on that practice.The poor economy has been tough on them. She told me if the kennels go that they will have to close.I was on the phone with her last night. She was crying.

I can understand your concern for your friend. And I for one, do think of the consequences.

However, I think your sell your friend short, too. People can adapt to changing circumstances. And frankly, this change is inevitable: excessive commercial dog breeding makes no sense when you consider how many dogs have to be euthanized annually.

In addition, cities and counties are going to tire of the cost associated with the excessive breeding of dogs. The fiscal note and the comments from the St. Louis county demonstrate this. Excessive dog breeding costs the entire society--it's as if we're subsidizing commercial dog breeders. This can't continue.

More states and cities are forbidding pet stores from selling dogs. They're not doing to so to be Big Government, but because they have to absorb the costs of excessive dog breeding.

And eventually more people will catch on to the problems of commercial dog breeders and either adopt from a shelter or go to a small, quality breeder. This is a field that can only die.

Will some of the large scale dog kennels close? Probably. Will some of the smaller close? Probably. Will all of them close? Experience from other states that have imposed these types of law shows us that, no, not all of the kennels will close.

Will your friend lose all of her customers? If she has focused purely on large scale commercial kennels, she's going to take a hit. I would hope, though, that she's kept a diverse practice. As a vet, she should also know that this change is inevitable.

("Peachey recently spent more than $20,000 on upgrades at his Stone Mountain Kennel, outside of State College, to meet stringent new health and safety standards that state officials say have gone a long way toward ending Pennsylvania's reputation as the puppy mill capital of the East.

While breeders like Peachey have found themselves shelling out tens of thousands of dollars to comply with the strictest kennel law in the nation, scores of substandard commercial kennels have opted to close instead – freeing a minimum of 14,000 dogs from bleak surroundings where they typically received little attention or care.")http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires...

("Twenty years ago, people knew that a "puppy mill" was a substandard kennel where unhealthy, overbred dogs were kept in horrendous conditions.

Today it's not so easy. In the last decade of the 20th Century, activist groups began to broaden the term to cover just about any kennel that they didn't like. As a result, commercial kennels and hobby breeders with more than an arbitrary number of dogs or litters have become targets for anti-breeding groups that lobby for laws to restrict these law-abiding operations.")http://www.canismajor.com/dog/puppymil.h...

"excessive commercial dog breeding makes no sense when you consider how many dogs have to be euthanized annually."

Well, except all these dogs are there because someone wanted them at some point. Breeders wouldn't be breeders very long if they bred animals they couldn't sell. The fact that consumers buy animals they can't take care of has nothing to do with the breeder.

If you want a bill that controls pet store sales, or requires pet owners to meet certain standards, then ask for that. Prop B addresses none of this. With continued demand, supply will be met somehow. If not from legal Missouri breeders, the demand will be met from illegal and out-of state breeders out of Missouri control, to the detriment of the dogs so supplied. The illicit drug market is no different.

The burden of prep B, by making breeding more expensive, and limiting the scale of breeding operations, falls precisely on those that we should be encouraging - those breeders that already dot all their I's and cross all their T's. Their prices have to remain low to compete aginst less ethical breeders, who will see this as a windfall until they are (maybe) shut down also. This is yet another way that prop B works counter to the way it is being promoted.

Better enforcement of existing law levels the playing field. Good breeders can continue to do what they do, while bad breeders face increasing pressure to shape up or face harsher penalties. Prop B distorts it, and encourages all breeders to cut corners when no one is looking.

Prop B is a bad law, and it is being promoted deceitfully. No one has yet shown that the media used to promote it are in any way typical of the industry. It is a smear campaign of the very worst. Voters should send this bill (and the out-of-state animal rights activists that have lavishly funded its campaign) away, and let true dog lovers advance a bill based on the AVMA recommendations of breeding dog care:

Mark, puppies from illegal breeders seldom end up at pet stores because of government regulations about a puppy having to be tracked from its source. Puppy brokers such as Hunte do insist that the puppies they buy from have to be a USDA licensed facility.

I have a friend up north who has a rescue Newfoundland. It had been in a pet store unsold for months, and was going to be "disposed of" before the rescue organization found it. The pup was tracked to here, in Missouri. So no, a lot of the dogs don't get sold, but the margins are so low so that if part of the inventory ends up "spoiled" it doesn't matter.

A lot of dogs, a significant number of dogs, come from rescues from crappy breeders, licensed and unlicensed. A lot of rescues are of females, rescued via auction. Go to any rescue chat forum and you'll hear tale after tale of rescues from auctions, or closed licensed breeders, or adoptions of unsold puppies considered no longer a "viable" product.

When you euthanize millions of dogs a year, commercial dog breeding makes no sense.

Dogs shoved into wire cages for the rest of their lives, whelping a litter every six months, with little or no exercise, and only handled a few times a year--just to feed an already glutted market not only makes no sense, it's cruel, regardless of the so-called "care" they're given.

And who pays for the rescues and the enforcement? Not the breeders. The Missouri Department of Agriculture already has said they don't get enough in licensing to pay for the number of inspectors needed. Oh, but raise the licensing fees, and agribusiness pulls the chain on the bought state legislators, and the bills are killed.

Too many of the dogs end up in shelters, most supported by donation, some by tax money, or both.

So we are, in effect, actually subsidizing an industry that makes no sense.

Proposition B is a good bill, and long overdue. Because of Missouri's dubious puppy mill status, this one bill can make a difference.

The probable real reason that the Schindlers are closing is that in July Fox News did an expose of them and an associated puppy store. The Schindlers tried to run the video camera down. After the story, the pet store was closed down.

Look beyond the people holding up a single dog, pretending that they can give 78 adult dogs (latest count of adults for the Tenderheart) that kind of affection and attention.

Missouri actually has the weakest laws in the United States. Why do you think that there are over 1500 licensed large scale dog breeders in Missouri when the next closest states, Oklahoma & Arkansas, have 350-400 each? Most states actually have UNDER 50 licensed large scale dog breeders. The reason MO has so many large scale dog breediers is that we have the WEAKEST laws for dog breeding. That is why MO is the Puppy Capitol of the United States. The laws we have are NOT strong enough.. Jake Carter commented earlier: "On Christmas morning and birthday morning they don't want some curr from a shelter. They want Tim or Tam to have a tiny shiney new purebred pup."

Actually, unless you are the parent of course, pets in do not make good gifts. Now if you as a parent know your child is ready for the responsibility of a pet (Or you are yourself:), then by all means give them a pet. On my 5th birthday, after successfully keeping a gerbil & a gold fish for a year, my parents let me choose a dog from the Humane Society to bring home. Muffin was on doggy death row & next in line to be PTS when I picked her out. She was a great little dog and companion for the next 18 years. Shelter/rescue dogs in the eyes of a 5 year old are no different than a purebred pup. At 5, we are not looking for a designer dog to show off, but simply a dog to have as a playmate & friend. My parents taught me a wonderful lesson that day & in the years after... a lesson of compassion. They taught me that having a pet meant I was responsible for caring for it. They taught me that part of being human is to be HUMANE.. In my opinion, Prop B boils down to responsibitity, ethics & compassion. I'm not against breeding dogs. I'm against unethical dog breeding practices. You should be too. How can we call ourselves human if we are not HUMANE! Vote YES on Prop B! . To read the proposed Prop B legislation, please visit the Secretary of State's website: http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2010peti....NOV 2,2010: Join me in VOTING YES! on PROP BSTOP PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!.NOV 2,2010: Join me in VOTING YES! on PROP BSTOP PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

("The reason MO has so many large scale dog breediers is that we have the WEAKEST laws for dog breeding. That is why MO is the Puppy Capitol of the United States. The laws we have are NOT strong enough.")

You insult the lawmakers of this state.The laws are fine. Better enforcement of current laws are needed.Bark Alert is a newer approach to that.Proposition B is poorly written and will bring on complicated consequences to the industry.Ever consider that there are over 1,000 licensed breeders in Missouri because H$U$, the spawn of PETA, has not accomplished their task of infiltrating Missouri's dog, animal, livestock and ag industries? (In fact, at one point in time Pennsylvania had approx. 2,000 licensed facilities.)Land is cheap in Missouri and it is in the center of the country. People are hard working and those who have licensed operations retain that hard work ethic that is being destroyed by the likes of HSUS, the spawn of PETA just as the Unions destroyed a few industries in this country. Using Animal Rights vs. Business Rights so that people can put food on the table and generate cash flow for their workers is what this Proposition will hurt most.Seeing the bigger picture, I believe that Proposition B, as it relates to proper business sense and its impact on an industry AND the dogs is irresponsible, unethical, and lacks compassion to the hard working, good people of Missouri.Support enforcement. Stop HSUS.Vote No on Proposition Bhttp://www.columbiamissourian.com/storie...

From:Advocates for Agriculture: ("The HSUS doesn’t want people using animals for any reason, not as pets or as sources of food. If this bill passes it helps them on both fronts. They know this will hurt people who raise dogs in turn making it harder for people to have dogs for pets. It will also get their foot in the door on the livestock front and further their argument that eating meat is wrong. HSUS is nothing but a fundraising machine and in order to keep that machine running they must continually push onerous regulations on people who use animals by distorting the truth. Please let your friends and family in Missouri know they should vote NO on Prop B.")http://advocatesforag.blogspot.com/2010/...

The lawmakers of this state receive a ton of money each year from BIG AG. They vote down most animal welfare reform legislation introduced. That is why we had to go to the people of Missouri. 192,000 registered Missouri Voters said they wanted to see this law come before the People to vote upon. Yes, better enforcement of current laws are needed, and PRop B will make it easier to enforce those laws by adding to and Clarifying those laws. Operaton Bark Alert is great! It is a HOTLINE that people can call into to report suspicians of puppy mills in their area. Proposition B clarifies & adds to existing law. I disagree that is it poorly written. I believe it has the power to make our dog breeding industry something to be proud of instead of ashamed of. Ray Wrote: "Ever consider that there are over 1,000 licensed breeders in Missouri because H$U$, the spawn of PETA, has not accomplished their task of infiltrating Missouri's dog, animal, livestock and ag industries? (In fact, at one point in time Pennsylvania had approx. 2,000 licensed facilities.)" This is an opposition PROPAGANDA STATEMENT. Prop B is only about DOGS in DOG BREEDING facilities. It has nothing to do with farming, horses, livestock and other ag industries. .Ray Wrote: "Land is cheap in Missouri and it is in the center of the country. People are hard working and those who have licensed operations retain that hard work ethic that is being destroyed by the likes of HSUS, the spawn of PETA just as the Unions destroyed a few industries in this country. Using Animal Rights vs. Business Rights so that people can put food on the table and generate cash flow for their workers is what this Proposition will hurt most." I agree that land is cheap in Missouri....heck it's getting cheap all over in this economy. I agree that people in Missouri are mostly hardworking people.But the rest of that staement is an opposition PROPAGANDA STATEMENT. Substandard Dog Breeders don't employ that many people if any. One of many reasons why they have such horrific conditions.Prop B will clarify current standards & make them easier to enforce.. Seeing the bigger picture, I believe that Proposition B, as it relates to proper business sense and its impact on the industry is responsible, ethical, and compassionate to both dogs and to the hard working, honest, moral people of Missouri.Support proper legislation that is enforceable..Vote YES on Proposition BSTOP PUPPY MILL CRUELTY!

Prop B is not just HSUS. This legislation has the support of of every rescue & shelter in Missouri. Rays previos statement about HSUS from the blog of Advocates for Agriculture is more opposition PROPAGANDA & SCARE TACTICS. Prop B is only about DOGS in DOG BREEDING facilities. It has nothing to do with farming, horses, livestock and other ag industries.

Wow, Marq. Calling the democratic process of a voter iniative campaign where 192,000 registered Missouri voters petitioned our government to put a ballot before the people to help prevent cruelty to puppies is tactics used by Adolf Hitler & Nazi Germany! Not the America I live in. I'm PROUD we have the right to do this. Even though the opposition tried multiple times to ban that right this year in House Resolutions HJR86, HJR76, HJR78 & HJR80 (All Barriers to Voter-Initiated Petitions).. Now I think those House Resloutions were closer to that Nazi description since it would have taken away a citizen's rights to petition for animal welfare. .PREVENT PUPPY MILL CRUELTYVOTE YES! on PROP B!

Ray... Glad to know you don't think of yourself as Adolf Hitler's propaganda minister. I didn't say you were...what I said was that some of the things you are saying are Prop B opposition PROPAGANDA & SCARE TACTICS. They are not all based on truth, but misrepresentations. I never said anything refering to you as that horrible man. I'm insulted that you think I would. 6,000,000 people died in Nazi Germany. It was horrific & not to be taken lightly. We should learn from history. Not repeat it. .Back to the issue....And if Missouri's "already strict dog kennel laws and regulations on the books" were doing there job, then we wouldn't have 192,000 people signing a petition to say we need more legislation. Prop B will Add to and Clarify existing laws making them easier for our inspectors to enforce.

Marina:Answer me this...How will Proposition B better serve the state of Missouri's economic interests and this service industry in question?

Also, many of those people who signed the petition might just Vote No on the actual Proposition, as it is written and as they learn more about it, and many of these signers may not even show up to actually vote.As for originally signing a petition, most people who are asked, "Want to Save Dogs?" "Stop Animal Abuse?" "Help me get 75cents?" Sign here. Might just do so.As opposed to, "Want to kill an industry?" "Muck up Law Enforcement?" Advance the HSUS, spawn of PETA, agenda? Hurt Missouri's economy? See that tons of dogs are removed from good, law-abiding private citizens and dumped into an already strapped and strained non-profit sector? And help me get 75cents...Sign here.

How will Proposition B better serve the state of Missouri's economic interests and this service industry in question?Prop B will help add to clarify the existing laws in the dog breeding industry, making for easier inspections, making a better overall quality "product" for the industry to sell, less consumer complaints & a better image for Missouri.

True, there will be some people who signed the petition who will now have changed their minds & vote no. Just as there will be people who opted not to sign the petiton that have changed their minds & will now vote yes.THE POINT IS THE PEOPLE OF MISSOURI ASKED THAT THIS BE ON THE BALLOT THIS NOVEMBER.

As for originally signing a petition, in training for the signature gathering process, most petitioners were VOLUNTEER petitioners. I was at training sessions for petitioners (There are RULES to petitioning & you must register as a petitioner with the secretary of state's office). We were instructed to open with questions like "Want to help Missouri Dogs?" so that the people we approached could say yes or no. If they said yes, then were to explain that this is the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act & show tham the ballot Summary AND full language of the law. All of which is printed on the 4 sided form. No signer was to be rushed into signing, and allowed to take as much time to read the petition as they liked. (That's why we would have multiple boards ready for signing.) I saw volunteers across Missouri involved in this signature gathering process. In the final weeks there were a few paid signature gatherers I believe in Southeast Missouri. And Ray...the "And help me get 75cents...Sign here." is insulting to me after the amount of hours I have seen so many VOLUNTEERS put into this campaign.

You've fooled 190,000 with your poor puppy ad. What about the kittens? You are no different than the charismatic leader Jim Jones. Look at where he led over 900 people.Put a dog on a solid floor to urinate and poo? Have it walk around in it and then contaminate the little newborn pups? Then you add that the must clean at least once a day? That is totally rediculous. How about if mothers only changed a diaper on their baby once a day. Your method is far more laxed than what kennels are already doing. Many of our kennels use power wash systems more than once a day. The urine and feces falls through to a catch system that is funneled into a cess pool. You totally misrepresent the facts of the bigger picture by lumping everyone into the "bad" category. One child is bad in a classroom. Therefore everyone must stay in from recess. This is so wrong.

When your "volunteers" went out to get those signatures did they inform those people about the entire content of prop B?Did they point out LINE #9? "Pet" meaning any domesticated animal in or near a household?" Friends, I am looking out my back window at a flock of sheep and out my front window at my herd of cows. Take a look at what HSUS did in California and Florida. They went after the livestock. Mr. Tony LaRussa is a vegetarian. Do the math folks.

Marq S....to compare me with Jim Jones. Wow. You really sunk to a new low to try to prove your point. Sorry guys. You can't intimidate me off this board like you try to do to every one else that disagrees with you.

Marq also said..."Many of our kennels use power wash systems more than once a day" yeah... I know.. they don't always take the dogs out those cages when they do that either.... those sickos.

So I guess Marq S doesn't think the dogs cages need to be cleaned everyday either according to his last post. So how long is it ok with you then to let the filth pile up then?

The volunteers I trained with were told to show people the proposition & let them read it. Line #9 was not ommited from the sheets. It's the same then as it is now. I'd hate to smell your house if you got sheep & cows sitting right outside your window. I would think they would be outside of your yard in the fields or barns... Your are very much EXAGERATING & reasonable people see right thru your scare tactics.

YOU ARE GOING WAY OFF TOPIC MARQ S. But since you went there, here's my response: What happened in California is that chickens will have more than an 8.5"x11" area to live in now. You really think it's okay to house chickens their whole life packed 10-12 in a batterycage. DISGUSTING. BIG AGRICULTURE is KILLING the SMALL FARMER who can't compete against the cruelty factory farms inflict. This however is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SUBJUECT! YOU ARE GOING WAY OFF TOPIC MARQ S.

WHo cares if Tony LaRussa is a vegetarian? Does that have ANYTHING at all to do with Prop B? NO it doesn't. Stop trying to mislead people. Prop B will not affect Farming or livestock. It's about DOGS in commercial Dog Breeding Facilities.

‘These laws are designed in ways that now allow the seizure of our dogs with NO cruelty charges or criminal behavior TO dogs. It’s all just in the numbers.50/25. In IL it was 6; in MN it was 3. Several times the sale of one puppy has been the definition of a commercial kennel. Simply HAVING intact dogs is now a crime.’")http://www.topix.com/forum/city/mexico-m...

That's the second so called "article" I've seen from Mindy Ward in the Missouri Farmer Today. There are so many falicies in that article it is disgusting. No fact checking. Just basically a mouthful of the same misrepresentation the opposition to Prop B spwes. HEr writing is "Commentary" not a real news article. There was not one interviews with a supporters of Prop B. Only interviews with opposition. And she's the photographer. How convienient. She failed to show pictures of how the breeding dogs at that facility were kept also. Guess the Missouri Farmer today doesn't believe in "Fair & Balanced" reporting.

("Jon Hagler, director of the Missouri Department of Agriculture, said since 2009, when Gov. Jay Nixon took office, Missouri has taken steps to improve oversight of dog breeders.

The department started Operation Bark Alert, a hotline to target unlicensed and substandard breeders, and also added two new inspectors. Since then, Missouri issued about 366 more breeder violations than the previous year, according to the department.

There are also about 350 fewer breeders now in Missouri than there were before January 2009, and the state has rescued about 3,700 dogs, the department said.

Why is it that Barbara Schmitz refuses to answer legitimate questions in a debate? Where is the model kennel that HSUS built? The veterinary and production records?She was asked that point blank in a live debate today.

jake carter, if you're going to go off-topic to this story, you should provide a link to radio program which generated your comments.

I found that jim foster's comments to be disingenuous. He talks about hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans, but then he talks about only a 100 dogs.

Which kennels have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars? For only a 100 dogs?

And then he says the entire veterinarian community is going to go under. So every vet in the state is a kennel vet? Or is it closer to about a dozen or so, who have placed their names at the Alliance for Truth site?

And seriously -- do we really, really think that Purina is going to go under because of the puppy mill bill?

Come on people--please, use some common sense.

What kennel the US built? What he hell is he talking about?

The wire flooring issue -- can dogs not go outside? Don't they get outside? Don't they even get friggen walks?

Jim Foster isn't very credible. Any veterinarian that supports a dog living in cage all their lives doesn't rate highly with me. He's offensive, ignorant, and sold his veterinarian oath out for money a long time ago.

What a joke.

Puppy prices go through the roof --and there's the "We'll have to import the dogs from China!!" Unbelievable.

What disturbed me, though, is how much Jim Foster is willing to, how shall we say it politely, stretch the truth to meet his own aims.

Anti Proposition B people, do you really think we're that stupid in Missouri?

Listen for yourselves. Use your brains. Make your own decisions.

I look forward to the detailed writing here in this publication. I worry, though, that you'll get your facts from people like Jim Foster.

Please listen to this broadcast. A fellow veterinarian represented our profession well today. Missouri voters need to wake up. Listen to what an experienced licensed Missouri veterinarian has to say. Funny how he couldn't get any answers to valid questions. Please Vote NO on Prop B

I would also like to see that model kennel that HSUS built. Our profession isn't based on some whim of an animal planet wannabe. Veterinarians have years of education and long hours invested in this profession. To allow a special interest group to step in and say that they have a method that is better without proof?

I listened to the same broad cast & I thought that man was very overbearing and could care less about the welfare of the animals. Sounded to me like he was all about the money. He continually went off-topic. I heard a lot of the same BS from him that I see here. Also, the moderator gave him the last word, without letting Barbara reply (except for one question). Reasonable People will see thru the falisies of his arguements. .Today, The Kansas City Star and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch have both endorsed a YES vote on Prop B.

Who cares what you consider to be an overbearing businessman? If he's advocating for an industry within legal parimeters, if you don't like his bedside manner, that doesn't make him a "bad person" an animal abuser or an unconcerned citizen.Barbara on the other hand is a flake and threatens to destroy the livelihood of Missourians with her emotional appeal void of substance.Vote No on Proposition B.

The valid points that he made were based on common sense animal husbandry. He gave a totally valid example of using tender foot flooring that would satisfy both arguments. It is solid, non flimsy, warm, and perforated for feces and urine to fall through instead of dogs walking in it. Whoever came up with this only mandated a cleaning of once a day. How stupid is that? Would you only change a baby's diaper once a day? Barbara Schmitz was asked valid questions by an experienced professional and also a caller who evidently had thought long and hard about his question. Each time she went in a totally different direction gave no response. Lawyer talk? Isn't she a lawyer?

Lets see Republican Party, Tea Party and I believe League of Women Voters have condemned Prop B?I also read where Columbia Chamber of Commerce has also given the thumbs down on it.Several of my colleagues in St. Louis and Kansas City have made anti prop b cards and are sending them to their client lists. I know one clinic that has their techs forming a calling chain.

I personally know Dr. Foster. It amazes me that people like Marina Shane can be a part of an organization that claims to be humane? The kinds of remarks that she is making toward a professional in this state are beyond reproach.It really does make you wonder if there is some motive here.

Excellent article.I sent it with my son to school. They read it in his journalism class and they also logged on and listened to the debate with Dr. Foster and Barbara Schmitz. I asked what did you think? He said it was obvious that the woman was unwilling to answer the questions.

("Friday, October 22, 2010Missouri's Prop B Bad For Beagles & Beef: ...Not surprisingly, the Washington, D.C.-based anti-agriculture Humane Society of the United States sponsored this initiative that can have potential far-reaching ramifications for the Missouri livestock industry.

A rubuttal to arguements from the opposition posed to me:• The word "puppy mill" is defined as a substandard commercial dog breeding facility. On 08-13-10, a Cole County circuit court judge upheld the initiative's ballot title ("Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act") and ruled that the language drafted by Secretary Carnahan for the petition summary was "neither insufficient nor unfair."

• Proposition B addresses the issues concerning Missouri's animal welfare laws within the Commercial breeding industry. Those people breeding dogs for sale without licenses are breaking the law also. They can be shut down for operating a business without a license. Hoarders fall under animal neglect/animal cruelty laws. The intent of Proposition B is to improve the quality of life for dogs in commercial breeding facilities.

• Propostition B creates a misdemeanor crime of "puppy mill cruelty" for any violations. As defined in the text of the law: A person is guilty of the crime of puppy mill cruelty when he or she KNOWINGLY violates any provision of this section. The crime of puppy mill cruelty is a class C misdemeanor, unless the defendant has previously pled guilty to or been found guilty of a violation of this section, in which case each such violation is a class A misdemeanor. Each violation of this section shall constitute a separate offense. If any violation of this section meets the definition of animal abuse in section 578.012, the defendant may be charged and penalized under that section instead.

(The opposition's arguement that "A drop of kibble in the water bowl a cobweb in the corner of a building, a scratch on a painted surface, etc" will cause someone to be arrested for Puppy Mill Cruelty is ridiculous! Proposition B states that the animal's enclosure is "cleaned of waste at least once a day while the dog is outside the enclosure" and " Sufficient food and clean water" is defined as "access to appropriate nutritious food at least once a day sufficient to maintain good health; and continuous access to potable water that is not frozen, and is free of debris, feces, algae, and other contaminants." )

• Regarding stacked cages: Prop B reads "Sufficient housing, including protection from the elements" means constant and unfettered access to an indoor enclosure that has a solid floor; is not stacked or otherwise placed on top of or below another animal's enclosure; is cleaned of waste at least once a day while the dog is outside the enclosure; and does not fall below 45 degrees Fahrenheit, or rise above 85 degrees Fahrenheit."For Dogs in Commercial Breeding Facilities, the cages are their perment home. In Shelters, the cages are temporary homes for the dogs. There is a HUGE difference between keeping a dog in a stacked cage for a few days to weeks versus 10-15 years!The Opposition's arguement that "Show breeders with more than ten intact female dogs could not crate their dogs for any purpose while preparing for shows, grooming or keeping intact females separate from males. " is FALSE.The truth: Prop B reads: This section shall not apply to a dog during examination, testing, operation, recuperation, or other individual treatment for veterinary purposes; during lawful scientific research; during transportation; during cleaning of a dog's enclosure; during supervised outdoor exercise; or during any emergency that places a dog's life in imminent danger. This section shall not apply to any retail pet store; animal shelter as defined in section 273.325; hobby or show breeders who have custody of no more than ten female covered dogs for the purpose of breeding those dogs and selling any offspring for use as a pet; or dog trainer who does not breed and sell any dogs for use as a pet. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit hunting or the ability to breed, raise, or sell hunting dogs.

Rebuttal PART 3:•Proposition B Reads: " Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person may have custody of more than fifty covered dogs for the purpose of breeding those animals and selling any offspring for use as a pet.The Opposition's Arguement that "Under Prop B Legal, licensed breeders could have NO MORE than 50 dogs, regardless of the excellent care they receive while anyone not breeding dogs could have unlimited numbers of dogs living in filthy conditions." is FALSE. They're are hoarding & animal neglect laws in place that apply to these conditions for people without licenses for breeding.The Opposition's Arguement that "Prop B creates the first step in HSUS and other animal rights groups dictating the number of animals one may own. " This is an outright LIE and SCARE TACTIC by the opposition! The only way to limit the number of animals a person owns is to legislate the number. There are already different ordinances from county to county stating how many domestic pets an individual can keep in a home. These numbers vary from county to county & city to city. •Proposition B reads: "Necessary veterinary care" means, at minimum, examination at least once yearly by a licensed veterinarian; prompt treatment of any illness or injury by a licensed veterinarian; and, where needed, humane euthanasia by a licensed veterinarian using lawful techniques deemed "Acceptable" by the American Veterinary Medical Association."The oppositions arguement "Prompt treatment for ANY illness or injury would be required by a licensed veterinarian, including something as simple as an upset stomach, torn toenail, cut on the nose, or any minor issue often treated by the breeder. Costs for veterinary care for minor issues would skyrocket, resulting in fewer purebred dogs available for public demand. "This is a misrepresentation of the legislation & blows it out of proportion. For one: Dogs can't talk to tell you they have an "Upset stomach" but if the dog is throwing up … don't you think the dog needs to see the vet? If a torn toenail causes that dog to limp…the dog should see a vet! If a cut on the nosewon't heal …yes that dog should see a vet! Right now, a vet is only required to show up once a year to a breeding facility. That doesn't mean that the vet sees every dog for an exam. With Prop B, each dog will be required to have an actual exam at least once per year.

Rebuttal PART 4• Prop B reads: ""Regular exercise" means constant and unfettered access to an outdoor exercise area that is composed of a solid, ground level surface with adequate drainage; provides some protection against sun, wind, rain, and snow; and provides each dog at least twice the square footage of the indoor floor space provided to that dog." The Opposition's arguement that: "Prop B requires constant and unfettered access to an outside exercise area which will be deadly to newborn and non-weaned puppies that may crawl outside to follow their mothers and cannot find their way back inside. Babies will die of heat exhaustion and dehydration in the summer and hypothermia in the winter. Drafts of air created by required indoor/outdoor runs for mothers will ensure upper respiratory stress and pneumonia for babies, resulting in the deaths of many newborn puppies. " Is FALSE, REDICULOUS, & YET ANOTHER SCARE TACTIC! Prop B ALSO states that "This section shall not apply to a dog during examination, testing, operation, recuperation, or other individual treatment for veterinary purposes". Bearing & weaning puppies qualifies as RECUPURATION. During the weaning process, neither the breeding dog not the puppies would have to bear to the unfettered access condition.•Prop B states: "Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit hunting or the ability to breed, raise, or sell hunting dogs."The oppositions arguement that: "Breeders of hunting dogs are exempt from licensing unless even one of their dogs or puppies is sold as a pet or lives inside the home of the purchaser." IS A LIE & SCARE TACTIC. • The oppositions arguement: "There is no scientific basis for eliminating tenderfoot flooring which allows for easy cleaning and sterilizing of enclosures. " WOW! DO YOU REALLY NEED AS SCIENTIFIC STUDY TO KNOW THAT WIRE BOTTOM CAGES CAUSE SPLAYED PAWS & THE INABILITY TO WALK ON SOLID GROUND? You Tube some videos of dogs in puppy mills & see it for yourself.:

Rebuttal PART 5:• Prop B States: "Necessary veterinary care" means, at minimum, examination at least once yearly by a licensed veterinarian; prompt treatment of any illness or injury by a licensed veterinarian; and, where needed, humane euthanasia by a licensed veterinarian using lawful techniques deemed "Acceptable" by the American Veterinary Medical Association." & also "Adequate rest between breeding cycles: means, at minimum, ensuring that dogs are not bred to produce more than two litters in any 18 month period."The Opposition's Arguement : "Proposition B interferes with the working relationship between a breeder and his or her veterinarian on the health of their dogs and the frequency of breeding. The Department of Agriculture would be charged with determining the breeding frequency of dogs in licensed facilities." MORE SCARE TACTICS FROM THE OPPOSITION. Prop B simply says the dogs need to be seen by a vet at least once a year for an exam & that they cannot be bred more than 2 times in 18 months. The "Relationship" between a breeder & a vet is only as good as the breeder wants it to be with or withour prop B!• The Opposition's Arguement: "HSUS has introduced Prop B as a means of eliminating the legal, licensed professional dog breeders in Missouri. According to the Department of Agriculture, no current licensed breeder can comply with the regulations put forth in Prop B, no matter how clean and well run the facility. Cost prohibitive space requirements coupled with misdemeanor crimes for the most minor of issues will eliminate the legal industry in our state. " MORE SCARE TACTICS FROM THE OPPOSITION. First off, it's not just HSUS, but also, HSMO, MAAL & ASPCA invloved with this legislation. I've also never seen where the Dept of Agriculture has said "no current licensed breeder can comply with the regulations put forth in Prop B" These are reasonable measures that GOOD breeders already comply with!• The Opposition's arguement "Only unlicensed, substandard breeders will be left to produce puppies while continuing to hide from state laws. " STILL MORE SCARE TACTICS FROM THE OPPOSITION. Unlicensed breeders can be shut down for doing business without a license!

Rebuttal PART 6:PROPOSITION B READS: "The provisions of this section are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other state and federal laws protecting animal welfare. This section shall not be construed to limit any state law or regulation protecting the welfare of animals, nor shall anything in this section prevent a local governing body from adopting and enforcing its own animal welfare laws and regulations in addition to this section.".MISSOURI IS THE SHOW ME STATE,IT'S TIME TO SHOW COMPASSION!VOTE YES! ON PROP B! More info about Missouri Puppy Mills & Animal welfare Law in Missouri can be found at: http://www.maal.org/Puppy-Mills.aspJoin the Campaign at: www.yesonpropb.comSee what a puppy mill looks like:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60LiJE-Cm...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhbp7Jz0l...According to the Department of Agriculture, A Blue Ribbon Kennel has exceeded industry standardswhen it comes to the care & welfare of animals. They are held to a higher standard than any other kennel in Missouri. See what a Blue Ribbon Kennel looks like:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdI2U6dgA...A picture says a thousands words.This is why Missouri needs better commercial dog breeding laws.Our weak laws are the reason that Missouri is the puppy mill capitol of the United States. Please join me in voting YES on Prop B!November 2, 2010 YOU CAN HELP STOP THE CRUELTY! VOTE YES on PROP B!

Sorry folks but those of us who do the licensed kennels in this state do provide a veterinary health program. I've been doing this longer than most of these so called humane extremist have been alive. There are reputable breeders out there who go beyond good and have for years. Your little humane folks have been taking your money for years by playing poor puppy on tv. Where are all those millions?Central Humane doesn't get it. Just read where the Humane Shelter in Hannibal Mo. can't get behind it because they know that this will hurt reputable breeders. READ LINE #9This is the door into the livestock industry. I am a veterinarian not a vegetarian!!!

The veterinary community is rising up!!!Who do you believe? An anemic HSUS rep that can't answer valid questions? How about trusting the people that actually work with animals and are professionally trained to do it. HSUS is pushing a scam. No more purebred puppies and no meat is their agenda.

I guess my thoughts are along the lines of how does a "non-profit" animal rights group bring a piece of legislature in to Missouri from New York?How can a non-profit circumvent our veterinary profession in this manner?

I've heard some comments made by HSUS that our moral compass is off. Well my friends someone at HSUS pulled a good one today and got caught in a huge lie. Barbara Schmitz attempted to discredit our colleague who was debating her today on KMOX St. Louis radio. The host was shocked and so was her victim. Thank you to our colleague for showing the world what HSUS is really all about.